Pages

New Media vs. The Alt-Right Movement.

8/15/16 Justin Arn
In what I can only describe as a stunning display of political power, Hillary Clinton has just effected her finishing move on the Donald J Trump 2016 Presidential campaign. That power had nothing to do with the strength of her oration as was commonly being reported by the media however. What was on display here was her dominance of the Press.

Exactly how buttoned up has she got the News Media at the moment?

Well, I am 20 pages deep in a Google News Search of "alt-right." Despite this I have yet to come across an actual website from the so-called-movement. Every search result I get is a hit-piece of 'journalism' designed to frame and define this supposedly new political force.
Unable to find the Alt-right movement, I am dutifully checking each search result for the following, however:

1) On a scale of 1-10 what's the articles' general tone regarding the "alt-right" movement?

2) Did the author speak to anyone who referred to themselves as part of the "alt-right" movement?

3) If derogatory terms were bandied about, Write down the most offensive one.

The 200 top search results were exclusively dedicated to hack-job articles written on major and minor publications throughout the country. Not a single one could come even close to what any objectively minded individual might call "fair." Mind you, all I did was search "alt-right." I was looking for news from the 'movement' itself, not a flood of faux-news reports about it.
I think that pretty clearly sums up the power of this so-called-movement.

What is bothersome is not just that I have already done more research than anyone from a news outlet reporting on the issue has.

It is the sheer volume of writers, book reviewers, and bloggers (I think someone even gotten a cartoonist involved) that have jumped on board "the narrative," that is so shocking. They are all desperate to eviscerate the "most racist movement since the KKK".….. but first they have to explain who the group is, since no-one before now had ever heard of them.

Mind you I am heartily impressed by the assuredness of these writers as they explain what the enemy believes while never actually speaking with them. It takes balls to write a headline that reads:

"Trump's new base tied to hate crimes; here's the 5 things you need to know!"

What is even more disturbing is that when I come across an article that does finally mention a member of this so called movement, I find he's tied to a website so repulive no one in their right mind would think such a movement could be successful. Indeed his so called "home of the alt-right" garners fewer comments in the posts than my posts do (that's really saying something). To be honest I'm concerned that the site itself was created for the sole purpose of being used for cannon fodder.

It's tough reading the articles these kids are pumping out too. They're mostly young early- 20's, by the profiles. They attended University and majored in communications and public relations, clearly. The better looking ones are even getting some TV time out of all this.

They're just like you and me, though. I have to remind myself as I peruse their pseudo-intellectualism, ad hominem nightmare scenarios, and outright lies. All of which are purposely designed to emote fear and rage in their targets: You and I, the American people.

Oh, and of course, one other group, arguably the most important group in 2016 election: Black voters.

Indeed, the most disturbing aspect of this charade is that it is aimed at an already rightfully indignant African-American electorate. This beleaguered section of society whose primary protestory message at current is, essentially, "Stop killing us!" are now being told that white-supremacist Nazis are taking over the executive branch.

You can almost hear the politial handlers shelling out their orders...

"Keep the Blacks from even considering the alternative option. Remind them how important this election is. We cannot lose the Black vote, and we damned sure can't have them no-vote. We need all of them, and we need them to be emotional about this one."

It's all about divide and conquer, same as it ever was.

Over 250 Google results and counting, now. Power. Control the Press.

This is her big play and it has to work. She has already lost half the Sanders voters to Jill Stein. For most of us it was about getting rid of established politicians like herself, and if going Green helps that endeavour, all the better.

It is for all of those reasons that these fresh-faced new media children are pumping out shit trying to frighten people. They're being paid to beguile innocent folks at the behest of some politician. These kids were in elementary school on 9/11. They've spent half their lives being inculcated with fear about fantasy terrorists, so that others could profit. They watched liars manipulate the public and be rewarded time and again in every sphere in life.

As much as I might complain about their actions and morals, thesee kids have indeed been getting an education over the last 15 years, and by the looks of it they learned their lessons well. Lie and manipulate and inspire fear in an already highly charged environment. That is how you make it.

This is our fault for not standing up earlier, my friends. Yours and mine. There will always be cunning and deceit, but in our age, with our tools, and life experiences, we should have seen more improvement than this.

This is not progress.

Technology may have advanced us, but mass communication has devoured us in turn.

Unless we as a people, one people, can stand up and say "We have had enough of this bullshit," the narrative will not stop.

Has History been Altered?

Thucydides, the Ancient Greek Propagandist told as much. See what others had to say....

The Myth of Scientific Infallibility

Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet, puts it like this:

"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."

"To understand the potential costs of failing to engage at the level of method, consider theInnocence Project’s recent investigation of 268 criminal trials in which evidence from hair analysis had been used to convict defendants. In 257 of those cases, the organization found forensic testimony by FBI scientists to be flawed — a conclusion the FBI does not dispute. What is more, each inaccurate analysis overstated the strength of hair evidence in favor of the prosecution. Thirty-two defendants in those cases were eventually sentenced to death, of whom fourteen have either died in prison or have been executed. This is an extreme example of how straightforwardly deferring to expert opinion — without considering how those opinions were arrived at — is not only an inadequate truth-seeking strategy, but a potentially harmful one."